If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

A prominent libertarian constitutional lawyer and civil libertarian has drafted an article of impeachment against President Obama over his attack on Libya, throwing down a legal gauntlet that could be picked up by some Congressional Republicans

Bruce Fein, a former Reagan administration official in the Department of Justice and chairman of American Freedom Agenda writes in his 15-page argument of Obama's course that "Barack Hussein Obama has mocked the rule of law, endangered the very existence of the Republic and the liberties of the people, and perpetrated an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor."

Fein is a small-government conservative who worked on the impeachment of President Bill Clinton and also called for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, and his work doesn't represent the Republican Party line. But it comes as some Republicans on the Hill, led by Senator Rand Paul, object vociferously to Obama's decision to strike targets in Libya without Congressional authorization.

"He's been more bold than any other president," said Fein, who said Obama has failed to secure congressional approval for his military action in a much more brazen way than previous administrations.

One of the most outspoken critics of President Barack Obama has been conservative talk show host Mark Levin. But on his Tuesday evening syndicated radio program, Levin stuck up for Obama — at least as far as his right to use U.S. military force against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime in Libya.

The president has had his share of critics on the issue of using military force in recent days – both on the right and the left, and some have even questioned the constitutionality the intervention. However, according Levin’s interpretation of the president’s constitutional authority, a formal declaration of war from Congress is not required for him to proceed with strikes against Libya. (h/t The Right Scoop)

“You know, some of you aren’t going to like what I have to say because I don’t believe in politicizing the Constitution,” Levin said. “I believe the Constitution is the rock of the society. All this talk about the attacks on Libya are unconstitutional because we don’t have a declaration of war – that’s ridiculous. That’s absolutely ridiculous. There are many occasions where we don’t have a declaration of war because a declaration of war would require that we use all of our might to destroy our enemy. So you can be involved in certain battles or military activities that would not require a declaration of war. You can look throughout American history to prove the point. You can actually look at the conduct of the Founders when they were in government, soon after the establishment of our government. Just be very careful about your arguments and think them through for a principled point of view. Don’t listen to Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, unless you want to be entertained. Stick with the Constitution.”

Levin explained Congress could ultimately stop the military action against Libya if it wanted to – by defunding the war effort. However, he said neither Speaker of the House John Boehner, nor Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has shown any indication they want to do so.

“What amazes me is – is Congress passive, or is Congress dormant?” he said. “Congress could meet tomorrow and cut off funds – tomorrow, if that’s what Congress wants to do. Has Boehner proposed an emergency session of the House of Representatives, to cut off funds? No. Could he? Yes. Would he get the votes? I don’t know, but he could try. Could Harry Reid do the same? Yes. Will he? I don’t know. He could try. So it’s not like Congress is without recourse.”